(Post a new comment)

	nevadafighter 2005-04-03 09:34 am UTC (link)
	Jesus Christ--njyoder AND iangalaher in the same post? With those two it's guaranteed to be wank. Or to suck. Or both. (Reply to this)

	twocorpses 2005-04-03 10:14 am UTC (link)
	While some good points were made I cannot find them convincing when the posts are riddled with spelling mistakes. *sigh* (Reply to this)(Thread)

	rogue 2005-04-03 10:31 am UTC (link)
	Aw man, I hate that. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	twocorpses 2005-04-03 10:33 am UTC (link)
	Me too. And I was worried I'd make a spelling mistake in my comment. LOL (Reply to this)(Parent)

Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-03 10:38 am UTC (link)

I'm not religious and I'm pro-homosexuality, but I think that the Pope often got dragged over the coals a little unfairly for his stance on homosexuality. He was 85 when he died, and homosexuality has only really been accepted in general in recent years. The beliefs that he would have been brought up with, taught, and then studied intensely would have portrayed homosexuality in a negative light, simply because that was what was strongly believed at the time – and that was a belief that wasn’t simply limited to religion. That's not to say I agree with his stance or that others should, but his opinions are in part a reflection of the time that he grew up in. While they’re horrid, they’re also somewhat understandable. I think also that, even if one does say that his beliefs about homosexuals were disgraceful/completely wrong/left no room for redemption etc, etc, that at the same time people should also be able to acknowledge that he did a whole lot of good, as well. It doesn’t have to be black and white, a person can be of the opposite mindset of you and still do good things. He visited war torn areas and gave masses of people in those countries hope and inspiration, he constantly put his life on the line for his beliefs and his people even after he almost died doing exactly that. And, yeah. I’m not a big fan of religion and I’ve never cared much for the Pope – but I’ll give him his dues. I don’t feel sad for him, as by his own beliefs he’s going on to a better place, but I do feel sad for the people who cared so much for him, because in their eyes he was important, inspirational and kind person, and it’s always difficult to lose someone you consider in such a light. And, you know, I find it difficult not to respect a man a little bit simply for giving his all right to the very end. If nothing else, he was completely dedicated to his religion and his people. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. twocorpses 2005-04-03 10:42 am UTC (link)

You know, it would have been nice to see a comment like this in one of those communities with the pope!wank. Because seriously, when my mom called me and told me that he died I was all "It's about time!" which I guess is a little heartless but the man has been very sick for a long time. Anyway, my point was, this is the kind of comment that people need to read. It is well thought out and well presented with no spelling mistakes - at least no glaring ones anyway ;) - and is not an attack of any sort. Good on you mousie for making me think at this ungodly hour. LOL ;) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-03 10:46 am UTC (link)

Hell, I admit I copied the post into Word before I posted it - you've made us all paranoid! Unfortunately, Word didn’t pick up my nasty habit of occasionally leaving out words or not quite putting my thoughts in quite the right order. Damn it. But, yeah. I think a lot of people breathed a sigh of relief when he died, and for his sake as opposed to any true hatred for him. I can't remember a time when he wasn't frail and sickly, and I'm 23. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. twocorpses 2005-04-03 10:48 am UTC (link)

LOL! No worries, I was like "Oh no! I better not have any typos or anything in that comment!" heh I'm 23 too and I'm right there with you. I remember in 2002 when he was supposed to come to Canada (which he ended up doing) and I was like "WTF? Dude you're sick. Don't come!" but he did anyway. Good on him I suppose for having the faith and strength of his convictions to continue doing what he believed was right. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. suzywongdress 2005-04-03 04:27 pm UTC (link)

Applause to you. I admit: I'm not Catholic; I don't agree with Catholicism, confession, and the Popedom. Still, I don't have a burning hatred for the guy. Maybe he wasn't perfect, but he certainly did a lot more for the world than most of us are ever going to do. Am I sad he died? Not so much. I'm echoing your statement - as a 19-year-old, I grew up with the idea of a sick and senile Pope, and I've always just hoped he'd resign and live in obscurity, or just die peacefully and painlessly. I'm relieved he finally died, because it means an end to his suffering. I'm just sad that he DID have to suffer. [/.02] (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. bubosquared 2005-04-03 05:29 pm UTC (link)
	Ditto on the "only knew him frail and sickly" thing, which made it really weird to see footage of him in his younger days. He looked disturbingly like Robin Williams. O_o (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. munchkinott 2005-04-03 09:16 pm UTC (link)
	He looked disturbingly like Robin Williams. O_o I read that as 'looked disturbingly like Robbie Williams.' *facepalm* (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. entelodont 2005-04-03 07:11 pm UTC (link)
	Word to your post. And yeah, as a twenty-year-old, I can't remember ever hearing him speak clearly, or delivering more than Mass. It's very odd. I am certainly glad he went with relative speed; we can't live forever, and I'm glad this wasn't a horrible drawn-out affair, especially in light of recent events (not to mention the cable news vultures). (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. ladyofviolets 2005-04-04 08:14 pm UTC (link)

As a 26-year-old, I *do* remember the days he was able to speak clearly. I remember going in a stadium at age 8 with my older cousins to see him when he visited Chile, my country, and he looked pretty much okay. This impression was confimed by seeing footage about that, which shows images pretty much similar to the ones in my HD. Also... Pope: Will you give up on sex? Chilean kids/teens: Noooooooo! Pope: Erm... On sex without love? Chilean kids/Teens: Aaaaa, yeah. XDDDDDDDD (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. suzycat 2005-04-05 12:59 am UTC (link)
	I can - he was multilingual and pretty good at it, actually. Poor old Pope. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. fiatincantatum 2005-04-04 07:46 pm UTC (link)
	I feel so old. I remember when he became pope. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. adora_spintriae 2005-04-03 11:55 pm UTC (link)
	Tolerance was not invented in the 1970s. Get a new argument. Age or generational thought fashions does not excuse ignorance in regards to sexuality, human rights or democracy. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 01:46 am UTC (link)

No, but it certainly existed then. And while he came into power in the 70's, everything he learnt came in the decades before then. I'm not excusing his stance on homosexuality, hell, I find it pretty damn disgusting. But it is in some ways understandable. I think one could also debate whether the stance is ignorant given that he bases it off of his own religious sources. Again, I'm not religious and I'm not in a pooin to argue religious beliefs and so forth, but I doubt he simply woke up one morning and decided that homosexuality was teh evil. Was his stance on condoms and AIDS ignorant? Hell yeah. The main point of my post was more that, regardless of all the evil things he may or may not have done, that still does not negate the good things he did. Doesn't mean that those good things have the redeem him in others eyes, but to claim he did nothing good as many people seem to claim, is making everything far too black and white. (Original mouse) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 01:47 am UTC (link)
	Crap. 'pooin' is meant to be 'position'. Yeah, I have no idea how that happened. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. adora_spintriae 2005-04-04 02:12 am UTC (link)

everything he learnt came in the decades before then. Like I said, age does not excuse ignorance. I think one could also debate whether the stance is ignorant given that he bases it off of his own religious sources. Ignorance based on ignorance still doesn't make it right. Nor does it make it right when other more factually stable sources are consciously ignored in favour of those that support the power bases of the Church. but I doubt he simply woke up one morning and decided that homosexuality was teh evil. I doubt it as well, since homophobia is a far more complex and insidious part of our society. that still does not negate the good things he did. Apart from being the best publicity machine for the Catholic Church for the past few hundred years, I fail to see the supposed "good" things that he did. And I agree he didn't do nothing, but one has to understand the things he did in the context os his position of power and the Church within the world. Yes, he was a globetrotter, as much as a touring pop star plastered with product positioning is. The spoke the proper words of "Human rights" in front of microphones to keep up the farce, whilst promoting ideologies that undermined basic human rights of anyone who wasn't male and straight through the actual official teachings of the church. He canonized more saints than any other Pope previously. He was, to put it in the words of a friend, "An excellent Catholic spitpolish". And hey, if you admire people for being good advertisers, go right ahead. But I'm afraid I'm far too cynical to believe the gloss myself. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 02:31 am UTC (link)

everything he learnt came in the decades before then. Like I said, age does not excuse ignorance. And like I said before, I'm not excusing it. Just like I would never ever excuse someone molesting a child, but knowing that the molester had been molested himself as a child would mean that I might be able to understand it a tiny bit. Not forgive it, excuse it, or feel an ounce of sorrow for him, but just be able to understand a little how the siutation came about in the first place. I think I need to stress that, at no point am I making a call over whether he was a good or bad person, or a good or bad Pope. All I've personally said on the matter is that while I disagree heavily with his policies, I can understand partly why he felt a certain way on one of those issues, and that I admire a *bit* a man who stays as committed as he did right to the end despite the horrors of his health. I haven't been personally talking about the negative aspects of his rule as that was never the point of my response, but that doesn't mean that he did a whole lot of things that I disagree with/think was horrible. I think one could also debate whether the stance is ignorant given that he bases it off of his own religious sources. Ignorance based on ignorance still doesn't make it right. Nor does it make it right when other more factually stable sources are consciously ignored in favour of those that support the power bases of the Church. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this point, I'm afraid. I think whitewashing religion as ignorant is going a step to far, and I also feel that it's understandable that the highest appointed person in that religion would follow the texts and 'evidence' that is considered canon to the religion. Does that mean I think that the religion in question is often homophobic and old fashioned? Sure. But that's one of the reasons why I'm not religious in the first place. When he steps away from religion and makes completely wrong judgement calls on science etc (AIDS/Condoms), then, IMO, that's ignorance. that still does not negate the good things he did. Apart from being the best publicity machine for the Catholic Church for the past few hundred years, I fail to see the supposed "good" things that he did. And I agree he didn't do nothing, but one has to understand the things he did in the context os his position of power and the Church within the world. Yes, he was a globetrotter, as much as a touring pop star plastered with product positioning is. The spoke the proper words of "Human rights" in front of microphones to keep up the farce, whilst promoting ideologies that undermined basic human rights of anyone who wasn't male and straight through the actual official teachings of the church. He canonized more saints than any other Pope previously. He was, to put it in the words of a friend, "An excellent Catholic spitpolish". And hey, if you admire people for being good advertisers, go right ahead. But I'm afraid I'm far too cynical to believe the gloss myself. The Pope gave hope to so many people who were in such horrible places. *snorts* And I can't believe I'm going to such lengths to defend a religion I don't care for, but I suppose now I'm really more defending my initial points. He inspired people, he gave them faith. On at least one occasion, he was a MAJOR influence in obtaining piece between two warring countries. And, again. I'm not saying he was a good man or a good Pope, and I'm not saying that a lot of what he did wasn't for propoganda purposes. I'm most certainly not saying that the good he has done outwieghs the bad. I'm simply saying that he *has* done good things. And hey, if you admire people for being good advertisers, go right ahead. I don't think I've ever mentioned admiring him, unless you are reading more than I intended into the quote where I admired him a *bit* for being so 'dedicated at the end despite his health'. That had nothing to do with his policies or his faith. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 02:34 am UTC (link)

Man, I'm having a bad day with this. I haven't been personally talking about the negative aspects of his rule as that was never the point of my response, but that doesn't mean that he did a whole lot of things that I disagree with/think was horrible. Should have read: I haven't been personally talking about the negative aspects of his rule as that was never the point of my response, but that doesn't mean that he didn't do a whole lot of things that I disagree with/think was horrible. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. adora_spintriae 2005-04-04 08:36 am UTC (link)

I think whitewashing religion as ignorant is going a step to far I'm not whitewashing religion as ignorant. I'm simply pointing out that the beliefs in regards to most many things in this world are ignorant of basic facts. If one choses to believe in these things over obvious and well-know facts that contradict the official doctrine (for whatever reason, but in this case, for nothing except power), then that is an even greater crime. He inspired people, he gave them faith. Faith in and of itself is not inherently a good thing, nor is inspiration. And the whole "Major factor in European Politics" line is blown WAY out of propotion, thanks to, of course, the marverllously well-funded Catholic publicity machine. I am also not saying he didn't do good things in his life. What I'm saying is that one has to sort the fact from the bullshit which has been passed on for so many years like a bad STD. But hey, I do understand a grudging respect for someone who keeps on kicking (in a job as well) for that fucking long. It's worked for enough South American dictators and all. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. squib 2005-04-04 03:00 am UTC (link)
	*applause* Glad SOMEONE said that! My flist is drowning in a sea of wah-wah sorrow, it's like everyone has collectively taken leave of their common sense. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. bigi 2005-04-04 03:44 pm UTC (link)

I fail to see the supposed "good" things that he did. The work he did towards ending communism? Trying to repair relations between Catholics and other religious groups particularly Jews and atoning for past wrongs? Working with Bono to try to relieve Third World Debt? Being an outspoken opponent of any wars including both Gulf Wars? I'm not happy with his stance on sexual politics, far from it, but it wasn't the only issue he had some influence in. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 04:56 pm UTC (link)

His "defence" of the rights of christians in the Balkans lead to the ethnic cleansing of muslims, his "contribution" to the end of the old regimes in most Eastern Europe lead to most of these states living in Third World conditions, the old black marketers having become Mafia bosses and politicians. It's worth mentioning that the end of "Communism" in Polonia has transformed the country in a Catholic Teocracy in which most of the population live in poverty and the things that under the bad Commies were free, like contraception are now outlawed? Better, so there are going to be more abandoned children in Institutions for members of the clergy to abuse, cozily protected by the highest ranks of the church, like has happened for decades in the USA, UK and Ireland, where, even in front of criminal conviction, the Church policy is to deny? Oh and you call making a Saint out of Pio XII, the Pope that ordered Priests to hand in Nazis hands any jews looking for asylum, trying to improve interreligious relations? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. bigi 2005-04-04 05:16 pm UTC (link)

Oh please. Genocidal maniacs and corrupt crook politicians would take anything anyone says as a support of their own ends. like contraception are now outlawed? If they choose to outlaw contraception, that's them being stupid. France and Spain are also Catholic countries (it's the state religion) but I don't think any of them outlaw contraceptives. And while it is strongly discouraged by the chuch there is no law against contraceptive and no one - whether clergy or laity - would be excommunicated for encouraging contraceptive use. If they choose to follow the Pope and discourage contraceptive use - it was of their own free will. I don't see how you can blame JPII because other people choose to be idiots. They can use his words but since I doubt many of them pay attention to his words against anti-Semitism, anti-poverty and anti-war it's pretty obvious they're just picking and choosing what they want to hear from him. Oh and you call making a Saint out of Pio XII, the Pope that ordered Priests to hand in Nazis hands any jews looking for asylum, trying to improve interreligious relations? I'm assuming you mean Pope Pius. While that's one distorted version of his past, the truth is a little murkier. And, while we're on the subject of Nazis, did you know JPII was a part of UNIA an underground group dedicated to rescuing Jews during the Holocaust and spreading propoganda against the Nazis. No, somehow I don't think you did and if so you chose to ignore it because it didn't fit with whatever views you have. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 05:37 pm UTC (link)

Should I mention South America and the systematic prosecution of Liberal Theologicians and Christians? Including that dangerous heretic Anthony De Mello? Oh, and as for being selective in choice of information, I do notice you failing to mention the systematic covering of child abuse perpetrated by the clergy... Or it's enough to mention the steady decline in the numbers of Catholics ALL around the world during his reign? Anyway, for any point you make there is one I can make, so I'll leave you to your Princess D. syndrome and let his god be his judge. (Yes, I did not capitalise god on purpose) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. bigi 2005-04-04 05:40 pm UTC (link)
	And I leave you to your theories and ramblings which you didn't even try to back up with facts or documentation. Or at all really. But why would you - you didn't even read well enough to realize that I said I had left the chruch because I disagreed with the politics put forth by JPII. If that flew over your head I can see how more subtle details would be missed. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 08:40 pm UTC (link)
	France and Spain are also Catholic countries (it's the state religion) France and Spain have a state religion? I think that would come as a big suprise to them... (A different anon, can't remember her JF password) (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 09:26 pm UTC (link)
	D'oh. I was thinking of the concordats they each have (may still have) with the Vatican. Which is obviously different than a true state-sponsored religion. So no, France and Spain do not have Catholicism as their state religion. And, not to forget about them, neither does Poland. Mea Culpa. -- bigi -- bigi (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 09:27 pm UTC (link)
	Why did I sign that twice? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. adora_spintriae 2005-04-04 10:22 pm UTC (link)
	Like I said, I am too cynical to believe the hype, and that applies to his part in all those supposed things. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. amasaglajax 2005-04-04 02:09 am UTC (link)
	Uh, yeah, tell it to my 68-year-old Yugoslavian Catholic father. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. kadath 2005-04-04 06:06 pm UTC (link)
	*goes and stands on your side of the playground.* (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Yeah, it's a tad frustrating. (Anonymous) 2005-04-04 06:39 am UTC (link)

Honey, your response is very sweet. I confess I am somebody who remember the "young Pope", the one who loved skiing and mountaineering, who spoke clearly and who had a thrill of pleasure in hearing the shock in my fascist Granmother's voice when his name was anounced " He is a black man" she shouted, then corrected it to "He's a foreigner". Coming from the shock that was the sudden and quick pontificate of his predecessor, a lot of people had great hopes for him. He's young! He likes young people! He took John XXIII, the great reformer's name! These hopes were slowly crushed one by one, especially after the shooting that started his history of illness (there are have been rumours of him contracting HIV or hepathitis during surgery due to a bad transfusion, never proved, that explain his frail health state since). I can spend hours listing the horrors being pepetrated by the Church during his Pontificate. I will leave his god to jugde them. I will instead focus on the good: The only good thing that has been achieved by his stint on Peter's seat is the steady decrease in the number of catholics around the world. And I will try to remember him as the young Pope, surrounded by shocked Cardinals, skiing the black slopes on the Alps with a smile like a naughty kid. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	redwarrior 2005-04-03 07:34 pm UTC (link)
	It's kind of sad when people can't even respect the dead. Besides, all of the ppl in that wank with their very black-and-white viewpoints make me laugh. Gay isn't good; gay isn't evil; it just IS. DEAL WITH IT. (Reply to this)(Thread)

(Deleted post)

	fiatincantatum 2005-04-04 07:50 pm UTC (link)
	He's gone to meet his maker, probably as happy as a fly in a loo Depends on what God said to him when he arrived... Could have been a bit of an eye-opener *grin* (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(Anonymous) 2005-04-05 11:33 am UTC (link)

Yeah. It's times like this that make me really wish I truly believed in god, heaven and hell. Because if I did, I could be smiling right now at the thought of the verdict on where he's to spend eternity. God: Grief almighty, not another one. *peers at dead!pope over the top of his glasses, picks up tick sheet and pen, turns to Peter* Lets make this quick. Did he place people above power and money? Peter: He was the head of the biggest organised religion, man, what do you think? Uh, I mean, no. God: *ticks* Did he kill any people, and if so how many? Peter: Overall kills? Hard to say, what with ordering his followers not to wear condoms while AIDS has been doing the rounds. That and interfering with politics. I think the word I'm looking for is "uncountable". God: *ticks* Did he condone the covering up of crimes perpetrated by his staff? Peter: Like woah, man. The little children suffered all right. God: *ticks* Did he... nah, forget it, I've heard enough. Let me think. ... Wait, why am I even thinking about this??! REJECTED. *drop-kicks dead!pope back down the stairs* Fancy a game of golf, Pete? Peter: Sure. Satan: *looks up, switches off Mariah Carey cd* INCOMING! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	backfromspace 2005-04-04 01:57 am UTC (link)
	Dante said a whole lot of Popes were in Hell. ARE THEY YELLING AT DANTE? (Reply to this)